On 6/23/2025 5:37 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
Hi,
ISO is loosing it because it gives in to Teachers.
GUPU from Ulrich Neumerkel is also a Teaching project.
Notebooks can be also viewed as a Teaching project.
Still there were once rumors that Prolog was used
in Industry. But this was long long ago, and these
roots are possibly totally gone.
I don't believe anybody is using CLP or s(CASP).
Or CLP(Z) from Scryer Prolog. Also the USA
compiler builders are total cluless about logic,
and USA is dominant when it comes to compiler
builder. Take the dissertation of
Combining Analyses, Combining Optimizations
Clifford Noel Click, Jr. - February, 1995
He does't know a bit how conditional constant
propagation relates to logic.
Bye
P.S.: Compiler builders never had a formal education
in mathematical logic. Not enough time. They
were always busy in guzzling in machine code
operations, building highly sophisticated tables
that describe the machine code operations and
building simlarly highly sophisticated backends,
that are sniffing these tables. You don't find
such People in Prolog anymore. Somebody that
knows aassembly, just like Linus Torwald started...
A rather silly view. I suggest that you study the history of program
language formalization and compilation. Start with the crews in the
Nordic countries, Knuth and the graph theory bunch here in the USA,
those who worked both in the foundations of formal languages and
translations thereof. John McCarthy, primarily recognized as a logician, actually developed a compiler with a graduate student (his dissertation)
and *proved* it correct. There where many other logic dilettantes that
worked on correctness proving of implementations.
Few if any (none that I recognize anyway) in this near useless Newsgroup could hold a candle to the folks described above. I suggest that you do
a little serious research to fill in the names left out above and see
whether you could repeat the above nonsense.
Hell, even I combined a little math with compiling on a few occasions:
Once showing a register allocation problem to be equivalent to one of
the "Postage Stamp" problems - published an article from that work in
the Mathematics Monthly with Ronald Alter; Another time showed that a compiling scheme caused boolean expressions consisting of AND, OR, NOT,
and variables that where equivalent under double negation, arbitrary
nesting, and/or De Morgan transformations produced bit for bit identical
code that was optimal in most cases. And, hey, I'm just a beginner and
there are a lot of good people who have done a whole lot more.
Your above message smells of bragging and you haven't said a single precocious thing about compilers that I know of. I suggest that you take
a few months and review the available literature, pulled your head out
of where ever you've stuck it, then return here and critique what you
wrote.
You only listed some academics, nobody working
in industry. Cliff Click is from industry.
Michael Paleczny, Christopher Vick, Cliff Click:
The Java HotSpot server compiler. In: Proceedings of
the Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium
on Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium.
Vol. 1. USENIX Association, Monterey, California 2001
HotSpot became a product of SUN, and the name is
still all over the place in the OpenJDK and Oracle.
It is only succeeds by GraalVM and Truffle recently.
These industry people give a damn about mathematical
logic or logic programming, they even don't understand
and frown about it. See for your self:
Zürich, 2. 2. 2005 / 15. 6. 2005
Good Ideas, Through the Looking Glass
Niklaus Wirth
https://people.inf.ethz.ch/wirth/Articles/GoodIdeas_origFig.doc
6.2. Logic programming
Another instance of programming paradigm that has received wide
attention is that of logic programming. Actually, there is only a single well-known language representing this paradigm: Prolog. Its principal
idea is that the specification of actions, such as assignment to
variables, is replaced by the specification of predicates on states. If
one or several of a predicate’s parameters are left unspecified, the
system searches for all possible argument values satisfying the
predicate. This implies the existence of a search engine looking for solutions of logic statements. This mechanism is complicated, often time-consuming, and sometimes inherently unable to proceed without intervention. This, however, requires that the user must support the
system by providing hints (cuts), and therefore must understand what is
going on, must understand the process of logic inference, the very thing
that he had been promised to be able to ignore.
One must suspect that an interesting intellectual exercise was sold to
the public by raising great expectations. The community was in desperate
need for ways to produce better, more reliable software, and was glad to
hear of a possible panacea. But the promises never materialized. We
sadly recall the exaggerated hopes that fueled the project of the
Japanese Fifth Generation Computer, Prolog’s inference machines. Large amounts of resources were sunk into it. That was an unwise and now
forgotten idea.
Jeff Barnett schrieb:
On 6/23/2025 5:37 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
Hi,
ISO is loosing it because it gives in to Teachers.
GUPU from Ulrich Neumerkel is also a Teaching project.
Notebooks can be also viewed as a Teaching project.
Still there were once rumors that Prolog was used
in Industry. But this was long long ago, and these
roots are possibly totally gone.
I don't believe anybody is using CLP or s(CASP).
Or CLP(Z) from Scryer Prolog. Also the USA
compiler builders are total cluless about logic,
and USA is dominant when it comes to compiler
builder. Take the dissertation of
Combining Analyses, Combining Optimizations
Clifford Noel Click, Jr. - February, 1995
He does't know a bit how conditional constant
propagation relates to logic.
Bye
P.S.: Compiler builders never had a formal education
in mathematical logic. Not enough time. They
were always busy in guzzling in machine code
operations, building highly sophisticated tables
that describe the machine code operations and
building simlarly highly sophisticated backends,
that are sniffing these tables. You don't find
such People in Prolog anymore. Somebody that
knows aassembly, just like Linus Torwald started...
A rather silly view. I suggest that you study the history of program
language formalization and compilation. Start with the crews in the
Nordic countries, Knuth and the graph theory bunch here in the USA,
those who worked both in the foundations of formal languages and
translations thereof. John McCarthy, primarily recognized as a
logician, actually developed a compiler with a graduate student (his
dissertation) and *proved* it correct. There where many other logic
dilettantes that worked on correctness proving of implementations.
Few if any (none that I recognize anyway) in this near useless
Newsgroup could hold a candle to the folks described above. I suggest
that you do a little serious research to fill in the names left out
above and see whether you could repeat the above nonsense.
Hell, even I combined a little math with compiling on a few occasions:
Once showing a register allocation problem to be equivalent to one of
the "Postage Stamp" problems - published an article from that work in
the Mathematics Monthly with Ronald Alter; Another time showed that a
compiling scheme caused boolean expressions consisting of AND, OR,
NOT, and variables that where equivalent under double negation,
arbitrary nesting, and/or De Morgan transformations produced bit for
bit identical code that was optimal in most cases. And, hey, I'm just
a beginner and there are a lot of good people who have done a whole
lot more.
Your above message smells of bragging and you haven't said a single
precocious thing about compilers that I know of. I suggest that you
take a few months and review the available literature, pulled your
head out of where ever you've stuck it, then return here and critique
what you wrote.
Hi,
John McCarthy is of course an example of a person
with a strong inclinaton to logic and artificial
intelligence. Circumscription, Situation Calculus,
etc.. But this was long long ago. In 1991 John
McCarthy received the National Medal of Science.
So when John McCarthy retired, the internet began
to form, and people like Cliff Click built server
software and made their hands dirty with hard work
and sweating. Thats another kettle of fish, than
thinking from within an ivory tower, about the
question whether thermostats can be sentient.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
You only listed some academics, nobody working
in industry. Cliff Click is from industry.
Michael Paleczny, Christopher Vick, Cliff Click:
The Java HotSpot server compiler. In: Proceedings of
the Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium
on Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium.
Vol. 1. USENIX Association, Monterey, California 2001
HotSpot became a product of SUN, and the name is
still all over the place in the OpenJDK and Oracle.
It is only succeeds by GraalVM and Truffle recently.
These industry people give a damn about mathematical
logic or logic programming, they even don't understand
and frown about it. See for your self:
Zürich, 2. 2. 2005 / 15. 6. 2005
Good Ideas, Through the Looking Glass
Niklaus Wirth
https://people.inf.ethz.ch/wirth/Articles/GoodIdeas_origFig.doc
6.2. Logic programming
Another instance of programming paradigm that has received wide
attention is that of logic programming. Actually, there is only a
single well-known language representing this paradigm: Prolog. Its
principal idea is that the specification of actions, such as
assignment to variables, is replaced by the specification of
predicates on states. If one or several of a predicate’s parameters
are left unspecified, the system searches for all possible argument
values satisfying the predicate. This implies the existence of a
search engine looking for solutions of logic statements. This
mechanism is complicated, often time-consuming, and sometimes
inherently unable to proceed without intervention. This, however,
requires that the user must support the system by providing hints
(cuts), and therefore must understand what is going on, must
understand the process of logic inference, the very thing that he had
been promised to be able to ignore.
One must suspect that an interesting intellectual exercise was sold to
the public by raising great expectations. The community was in
desperate need for ways to produce better, more reliable software, and
was glad to hear of a possible panacea. But the promises never
materialized. We sadly recall the exaggerated hopes that fueled the
project of the Japanese Fifth Generation Computer, Prolog’s inference
machines. Large amounts of resources were sunk into it. That was an
unwise and now forgotten idea.
Jeff Barnett schrieb:
On 6/23/2025 5:37 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
Hi,
ISO is loosing it because it gives in to Teachers.
GUPU from Ulrich Neumerkel is also a Teaching project.
Notebooks can be also viewed as a Teaching project.
Still there were once rumors that Prolog was used
in Industry. But this was long long ago, and these
roots are possibly totally gone.
I don't believe anybody is using CLP or s(CASP).
Or CLP(Z) from Scryer Prolog. Also the USA
compiler builders are total cluless about logic,
and USA is dominant when it comes to compiler
builder. Take the dissertation of
Combining Analyses, Combining Optimizations
Clifford Noel Click, Jr. - February, 1995
He does't know a bit how conditional constant
propagation relates to logic.
Bye
P.S.: Compiler builders never had a formal education
in mathematical logic. Not enough time. They
were always busy in guzzling in machine code
operations, building highly sophisticated tables
that describe the machine code operations and
building simlarly highly sophisticated backends,
that are sniffing these tables. You don't find
such People in Prolog anymore. Somebody that
knows aassembly, just like Linus Torwald started...
A rather silly view. I suggest that you study the history of program
language formalization and compilation. Start with the crews in the
Nordic countries, Knuth and the graph theory bunch here in the USA,
those who worked both in the foundations of formal languages and
translations thereof. John McCarthy, primarily recognized as a
logician, actually developed a compiler with a graduate student (his
dissertation) and *proved* it correct. There where many other logic
dilettantes that worked on correctness proving of implementations.
Few if any (none that I recognize anyway) in this near useless
Newsgroup could hold a candle to the folks described above. I suggest
that you do a little serious research to fill in the names left out
above and see whether you could repeat the above nonsense.
Hell, even I combined a little math with compiling on a few
occasions: Once showing a register allocation problem to be
equivalent to one of the "Postage Stamp" problems - published an
article from that work in the Mathematics Monthly with Ronald Alter;
Another time showed that a compiling scheme caused boolean
expressions consisting of AND, OR, NOT, and variables that where
equivalent under double negation, arbitrary nesting, and/or De Morgan
transformations produced bit for bit identical code that was optimal
in most cases. And, hey, I'm just a beginner and there are a lot of
good people who have done a whole lot more.
Your above message smells of bragging and you haven't said a single
precocious thing about compilers that I know of. I suggest that you
take a few months and review the available literature, pulled your
head out of where ever you've stuck it, then return here and critique
what you wrote.
Fran's specialty was bring graph theory into computer development
On 6/24/2025 1:24 AM, Mild Shock wrote:
Hi,I see that you are not doing your homework. It's really necessary if you
Back in the early days SUN was already talking
about Java on in CPU. Interestingly this happened:
The most prominent use of Jazelle DBX is by
manufacturers of mobile phones to increase the
execution speed of Java ME games and applications.
A Jazelle-aware Java virtual machine (JVM) will
attempt to run Java bytecode in hardware, while
returning to the software for more complicated,
or lesser-used bytecode operations. ARM claims that
approximately 95% of bytecode in typical program
usage ends up being directly processed in the hardware.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jazelle
So in the 90's we had first internet, and then
in the 00's we had mobile phones. The 10's had
big data and early deep leearning.
But Python is still slow as fuck in the 20's.
They should invent a CPU that can do Pantilope,
i.e. direct executon of Python.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
Hi,
John McCarthy is of course an example of a person
with a strong inclinaton to logic and artificial
intelligence. Circumscription, Situation Calculus,
etc.. But this was long long ago. In 1991 John
McCarthy received the National Medal of Science.
So when John McCarthy retired, the internet began
to form, and people like Cliff Click built server
software and made their hands dirty with hard work
and sweating. Thats another kettle of fish, than
thinking from within an ivory tower, about the
question whether thermostats can be sentient.
Bye
Mild Shock schrieb:
You only listed some academics, nobody working
in industry. Cliff Click is from industry.
Michael Paleczny, Christopher Vick, Cliff Click:
The Java HotSpot server compiler. In: Proceedings of
the Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium
on Java Virtual Machine Research and Technology Symposium.
Vol. 1. USENIX Association, Monterey, California 2001
HotSpot became a product of SUN, and the name is
still all over the place in the OpenJDK and Oracle.
It is only succeeds by GraalVM and Truffle recently.
These industry people give a damn about mathematical
logic or logic programming, they even don't understand
and frown about it. See for your self:
Zürich, 2. 2. 2005 / 15. 6. 2005
Good Ideas, Through the Looking Glass
Niklaus Wirth
https://people.inf.ethz.ch/wirth/Articles/GoodIdeas_origFig.doc
6.2. Logic programming
Another instance of programming paradigm that has received wide
attention is that of logic programming. Actually, there is only a
single well-known language representing this paradigm: Prolog. Its
principal idea is that the specification of actions, such as
assignment to variables, is replaced by the specification of
predicates on states. If one or several of a predicate’s parameters
are left unspecified, the system searches for all possible argument
values satisfying the predicate. This implies the existence of a
search engine looking for solutions of logic statements. This
mechanism is complicated, often time-consuming, and sometimes
inherently unable to proceed without intervention. This, however,
requires that the user must support the system by providing hints
(cuts), and therefore must understand what is going on, must
understand the process of logic inference, the very thing that he
had been promised to be able to ignore.
One must suspect that an interesting intellectual exercise was sold
to the public by raising great expectations. The community was in
desperate need for ways to produce better, more reliable software,
and was glad to hear of a possible panacea. But the promises never
materialized. We sadly recall the exaggerated hopes that fueled the
project of the Japanese Fifth Generation Computer, Prolog’s
inference machines. Large amounts of resources were sunk into it.
That was an unwise and now forgotten idea.
Jeff Barnett schrieb:
On 6/23/2025 5:37 PM, Mild Shock wrote:
Hi,
ISO is loosing it because it gives in to Teachers.
GUPU from Ulrich Neumerkel is also a Teaching project.
Notebooks can be also viewed as a Teaching project.
Still there were once rumors that Prolog was used
in Industry. But this was long long ago, and these
roots are possibly totally gone.
I don't believe anybody is using CLP or s(CASP).
Or CLP(Z) from Scryer Prolog. Also the USA
compiler builders are total cluless about logic,
and USA is dominant when it comes to compiler
builder. Take the dissertation of
Combining Analyses, Combining Optimizations
Clifford Noel Click, Jr. - February, 1995
He does't know a bit how conditional constant
propagation relates to logic.
Bye
P.S.: Compiler builders never had a formal education
in mathematical logic. Not enough time. They
were always busy in guzzling in machine code
operations, building highly sophisticated tables
that describe the machine code operations and
building simlarly highly sophisticated backends,
that are sniffing these tables. You don't find
such People in Prolog anymore. Somebody that
knows aassembly, just like Linus Torwald started...
A rather silly view. I suggest that you study the history of
program language formalization and compilation. Start with the
crews in the Nordic countries, Knuth and the graph theory bunch
here in the USA, those who worked both in the foundations of formal
languages and translations thereof. John McCarthy, primarily
recognized as a logician, actually developed a compiler with a
graduate student (his dissertation) and *proved* it correct. There
where many other logic dilettantes that worked on correctness
proving of implementations.
Few if any (none that I recognize anyway) in this near useless
Newsgroup could hold a candle to the folks described above. I
suggest that you do a little serious research to fill in the names
left out above and see whether you could repeat the above nonsense.
Hell, even I combined a little math with compiling on a few
occasions: Once showing a register allocation problem to be
equivalent to one of the "Postage Stamp" problems - published an
article from that work in the Mathematics Monthly with Ronald
Alter; Another time showed that a compiling scheme caused boolean
expressions consisting of AND, OR, NOT, and variables that where
equivalent under double negation, arbitrary nesting, and/or De
Morgan transformations produced bit for bit identical code that was
optimal in most cases. And, hey, I'm just a beginner and there are
a lot of good people who have done a whole lot more.
Your above message smells of bragging and you haven't said a single
precocious thing about compilers that I know of. I suggest that you
take a few months and review the available literature, pulled your
head out of where ever you've stuck it, then return here and
critique what you wrote.
want to continue posing as an expert in fields such as compilers and who knows what about them. I'm going to give you a hint of one very
interesting researcher that you might want to get acquainted with:
Frances E. Allen. I believe that she was the ACM Touring Award winner
one year and gave lectures on various related topics. She might have
been a fellow of IBM Yorktown heights and was married to Jacob Theodore "Jack" Schwartz who, in addition to being a rather famous mathematician,
was the head of the DARPA computer science office (IPTO) for a few years.
Fran's specialty was bring graph theory into computer development
technology. What she wrote had a lasting impact. For example, in 1970
she published "Control flow analysis" in ACM SIGPLAN Notices, an
non-referred publication. However, if you look up that paper you'll note
a long string of references to in 2025. BTW hubbies specialties lay in analysis, not graph theory so he wasn't the source of her ideas.
I'll check back in a few days if I remember to see if you are doing home
work and ready to back your original claims. If not, I might pass on
another hint or two. Example, most people in the field would consider
Knuth's tour de force, TeX, to be a very sophisticate compiler. Would
you like to pass judgement on it too?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 39:15:01 |
| Calls: | 12,109 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,388 |